figured out a couple of things;they company that is doing it has a few other photographers the are stealing from, all connected to one lab,Talked with my account rep and will start to dig deeper into the theft tomorrow, my best guess at this point is someone who was employed by the lab managed to get this gallery some stolen prints, contacted the other photographers and will be calling the lab to develop a plan Monday...

the person that disposes of damaged prints, thought it was a shame to throw the rejects out, sold them all at his church yard sale to a gallery; the gallery posted these online, that's how I found out.

The lab went ballistic, took care of everything in less than 48 hours!

Does anyone else get bothered that it is pretty much the digital form of putting someone in a stockade? Don't get me wrong, I push very hard for protecting copyrights, I just find the public shaming aspect of this a bit horrendous.

Does anyone else get bothered that it is pretty much the digital form of putting someone in a stockade? Don't get me wrong, I push very hard for protecting copyrights, I just find the public shaming aspect of this a bit horrendous.

Nope, not me. They are thieves, publicly displaying their loots, so shaming them equally publicly makes sense. Also, it seems the most cost and time effective method to rectify the theft.

Does anyone else get bothered that it is pretty much the digital form of putting someone in a stockade...

I'm not sure what's worse - the unquestioning conviction in the court of public opinion of alleged copyright infringement, or the smug self-righteousness of the guy that's appointed himself as judge, jury and executioner in all cases of copyright law attached to the display of all images on all photography web sites in the known universe.

Shouldn't be too cynical I guess, this appears to be an altruistic endeavor after all - it's not like the guy's looking to make money out of it, is it?

Better question, is it technically copyright infringement for him to be using screenshots of a website he did not produce? As a web developer/designer by trade, I would say yes, yes it is. Oh the irony...

Better question, is it technically copyright infringement for him to be using screenshots of a website he did not produce? As a web developer/designer by trade, I would say yes, yes it is. Oh the irony...

No, no it isn't. It is known as fair use, a perfectly legal copyright concept.

No, no it isn't. It is known as fair use, a perfectly legal copyright concept.

I just fact checked myself and was coming to post the result.

It is grey at best. Due to the nature of this site, if he is not making money off of it, AND the site's in which he is producing the screen grab are more than one page, it is probably covered under fair use. But that isn't a guarantee. The prevailing cases seem to deem it fair use, but it isn't set in stone as fair use.

If it can be demonstrated as for commercial use, and the screen grabs are of one page sites, he could actually fall foul of fair use.